Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
On Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 1:39:46 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 19:48:01 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
False, of course. Al Gore had some election-year lies aimed that way, and as for \'make money\',
all Mann got was some frivolous lawsuits. The court had his legal team\'s fees reimbursed
by the jackals that brought the suit against him. The court did that because the suits
were found to be \'barratry\', rather than being serious complaints.
Freon is another fake.
Not so; that\'s a DuPont tradename for fluorocarbon products, under worldwide ban
due to ozone depletion.
Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.
\'clocked by\'??? Climate is affected by solar heat (influx of heat dominates during the day) and
radiative cooling (heat dissipates into space, dominates the heatflow at night). The steady-state
average temperature isn\'t proportional to anything the Sun does, but is set by the difference of
those two heat flows (the difference is zero when steady-state temperature is achieved).
So, your identification of \'solar activity\' is only a half-truth at best, and in most literature,
\'solar activity\' only means sunspot fluctuations, not solar heat output. Indeed, the solar
heat output is set by fusion rates in the sun\'s center, many thousands of miles away from
the photosphere where we see sunspots.
So it\'s a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.
Utterance of nonsense is detected. Agriculture, forestry, water resources, sea life are all being hurt
by climate change, and gazing at Mr.Sun isn\'t a rational plan to deal with it.
you are completely wrong
Okay, where? Zero details? It sounds like a lame excuse for a lack of criticism.
We all Love Carbon
That\'s an odd perversion; diamonds are pretty, though.
We all Love CO2
Live with it, yes; also a few other gasses.
The balance of soil carbon is held in peat and wetlands (150 GtC), and ....
and temporary surface repositories are not part of the carbon cycle in the atmosphere versus Earth\'s
crust, because they can go either up or down (they\'re inbetween, available to burn or get buried).
GHG - greenhouse gas emissions is an old fake and political agenda developed by US politicians to kill China economy
There\'s an agenda around it, nowadays, and politicians. The US can (and has) developed bits,
as have other nations; 192 of \'em if I remember the Paris Accords count.
but China mirorred the attack and turned himself into reduced emissions Global Factory
in green technologies like solar panels, wind turbines
It wasn\'t an attack. China is one of the 192 that joined the Paris Accord, and as you
say they\'re developing bits of their own agenda, as well as exporting bits.
Climate Change is clocked by fluctuations in solar activity Agenda
is backed today by NASA (Solar Lab) and others with public money, not coming from Russia.
Not true. Studied by solar scientists, yes; but what does \'clocked\' mean? And, where\'s
the citation we\'d expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?
On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 03:58:30 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
...where\'s
the citation we\'d expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?
read first
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sdo/main/index.html
On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 19:48:01 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
We all Love Carbon
We all Love CO2
excellent, excellentOn Wednesday, June 22, 2022 at 2:31:02 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 03:58:30 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
...where\'s
the citation we\'d expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?
read first
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sdo/main/index.html
No, not going to read an index... you didn\'t cite a single work, or result,
and that makes this an evasion rather than an answer.
Solar dynamics isn\'t significant heat modulation related to global warming.
Here\'s a picture from NASA
https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/
as you can see,On Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 10:39:46 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 19:48:01 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
snip
you are completely wrong
a a does like posting claims like that. Since he is an obvious idiot, it is a waste of bandwidth.
We all Love Carbon
We all Love CO2
Only those who are as brain-dead as a a.
snipped a large chunk of uncomprehended cut and paste which did say anything relevant
I am really sorry, you represent low science - no science but
Your sorrow should be directed at you own abysmal ignorance.
snipped more fatuous nonsense
Water H2O in its gaseous state, or water vapor, is the only greenhouse gas because of its high heat of vaporization
Water vapour - like gaseous CO2 - is a greenhouse gas because it absorbs and re-radiates specific near-infrared frequencies. Other molecules - like methane - that are active in the infra-red are also green-house gases.
https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=C7732185&Mask=800#Electronic-Spec
You\'ve actually got to take the rotational modes into account to work out what the infra-red spectrum actually looks like, and get reliable greenhouse numbers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svante_Arrhenius
had the right idea in 1896, but Knut à ngström in 1900 published low resolution infrared absorbtion spectra which appeared to show he\'d got it wrong. When we finally got spectrometers that could resolve the rotational fine structure, Arrhenius was vindicated, but he was dead by then.
The heat of vapourisation doesn\'t come into it
snipped more incoherent raving
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
in replyOn Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 11:51:32 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
On Wednesday, June 22, 2022 at 2:31:02 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 03:58:30 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
...where\'s
the citation we\'d expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?
read first
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sdo/main/index.html
No, not going to read an index... you didn\'t cite a single work, or result,
and that makes this an evasion rather than an answer.
Solar dynamics isn\'t significant heat modulation related to global warming.
Here\'s a picture from NASA
https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/
excellent, excellent
look again at your chart
Total Solar Irradiance values are fixed at 1361+/- W/m2 level
What matters is \"Total\"
Temperature increase by 1 degree C over the span of 100 years, as declared by Prof. Mann
is exactly within calculation/ data collected error.
What matters is Plasma Leaving the Sun and flares, clocking the Climate Changes on the Earth
http://sdoisgo.blogspot.com/2022/03/an-x13-flare-and-cool-view-of-plasma.html
https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/
There is an only one scientist at NASA, Solar Dynamics, who can tell you the thruth behind the coronal loops and plasma leaving the Sun cycles
BTW
Ask your friends from NASA Climate
to ink image and comments with full name next time
https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/
On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 12:25:11 UTC+2, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 10:39:46 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 19:48:01 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
snip
you are completely wrong
a a does like posting claims like that. Since he is an obvious idiot, it is a waste of bandwidth.
We all Love Carbon
We all Love CO2
Only those who are as brain-dead as a a.
snipped a large chunk of uncomprehended cut and paste which did say anything relevant
I am really sorry, you represent low science - no science but
Your sorrow should be directed at you own abysmal ignorance.
snipped more fatuous nonsense
Water H2O in its gaseous state, or water vapor, is the only greenhouse gas because of its high heat of vaporization
Water vapour - like gaseous CO2 - is a greenhouse gas because it absorbs and re-radiates specific near-infrared frequencies. Other molecules - like methane - that are active in the infra-red are also green-house gases.
https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=C7732185&Mask=800#Electronic-Spec
You\'ve actually got to take the rotational modes into account to work out what the infra-red spectrum actually looks like, and get reliable greenhouse numbers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svante_Arrhenius
had the right idea in 1896, but Knut à ngström in 1900 published low resolution infrared absorbtion spectra which appeared to show he\'d got it wrong. When we finally got spectrometers that could resolve the rotational fine structure, Arrhenius was vindicated, but he was dead by then.
The heat of vapourisation doesn\'t come into it
snipped more incoherent raving
as you can see, Sydney is low science, making irrelevant claims
--> Water H2O in its gaseous state, or water vapor, is the only greenhouse gas because of its high heat of vaporization.
Water vapour - like gaseous CO2 - is a greenhouse gas because it absorbs and re-radiates specific near-infrared frequencies. Other molecules - like methane - that are active in the infra-red are also green-house gases.
it doesn\'t matter! What matters is !!!!
Waterâs heat of vaporization is around 540 cal/g at 100 °C, water\'s boiling point.
Why does water have a high heat of vaporization?
That is, water has a high heat of vaporization, the amount of energy needed to change one gram of a liquid substance to a gas at constant temperature. Waterâs heat of vaporization is around 540 cal/g at 100 °C, water\'s boiling point.
On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 12:54:53 UTC+2, a a wrote:
On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 11:51:32 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
On Wednesday, June 22, 2022 at 2:31:02 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:
On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 03:58:30 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
...where\'s
the citation we\'d expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?
read first
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sdo/main/index.html
No, not going to read an index... you didn\'t cite a single work, or result, and that makes this an evasion rather than an answer.
Solar dynamics isn\'t significant heat modulation related to global warming.
Here\'s a picture from NASA
https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/
excellent, excellent
look again at your chart
Total Solar Irradiance values are fixed at 1361+/- W/m2 level
What matters is \"Total\"
Temperature increase by 1 degree C over the span of 100 years, as declared by Prof. Mann
What matters is Plasma Leaving the Sun and flares, clocking the Climate Changes on the Earth
http://sdoisgo.blogspot.com/2022/03/an-x13-flare-and-cool-view-of-plasma.html
https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/
There is an only one scientist at NASA, Solar Dynamics, who can tell you the truth behind the coronal loops and plasma leaving the Sun cycles.
BTW
Ask your friends from NASA Climate
to ink image and comments with full name next time.
https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/
in reply to low-science Sydney:
SDO is designed to help us understand the Sun\'s influence on Earth and Near-Earth space by studying the solar atmosphere on small scales of space and time and in many wavelengths simultaneously.
https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/
https://www.blogger.com/profile/16479620366654056823
http://sdoisgo.blogspot.com/
http://sdoisgo.blogspot.com/2022/03/an-x13-flare-and-cool-view-of-plasma.html
Blog Description
This is the Solar Dynamics Observatory Mission blog. It will consist of mission status, news, and event updates.